Energy for Sustainable Development 37 (2017) 7985

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy for Sustainable Development

Performance analysis of a grid connected photovoltaic system in

northeastern Brazil
Lutero Carmo de Lima , Leonardo de Arajo Ferreira, Francisco Hedler Barreto de Lima Morais
Mestrado Acadmico em Cincias Fsicas Aplicadas, Universidade Estadual do Cear, Fortaleza, CE 60740-000, Brazil

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This article presents the performance analysis of a 2.2 kWp photovoltaic system installed at the State University of
Received 21 October 2016 Cear, Fortaleza, Brazil (latitude 3.40S, longitude 38.33W and 31 m above sea level). The system was monitored
Revised 21 November 2016 from June 2013 to May 2014. In the measured period the annual energy yield was 1685.5 kWh/kWp. The average
Accepted 21 January 2017
daily reference, array and nal yields of the system were 5.6 kWh/kWp, 4.9 kWh/kWp and 4.6 kWh/kWp,
Available online 21 February 2017
respectively. The annual average daily array and system losses were 1.05 kWh/kWp and the annual average
Keywords:
array, system and inverter efciencies were 13.3%, 12.6% and 94.6%, respectively. The performance ratio and
Performance analysis capacity factor were 82.9% and 19.2%, respectively. These numbers highlight the relatively good performance
Grid connected of PV systems installed in the northeast region of Brazil.
PV system 2017 International Energy Initiative. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Cear
Brazil

Introduction
Energy is one of main ingredients for the development and mainte-
nance of a modern society with benets of its socio-economic and techno-
logical advancements. Providing energy for homes and buildings,
agriculture, transportation, services, and industries in a sustainable way
and at the same time guaranteeing resources for the future generations
is the ultimate challenge for the humanity. As a result of greenhouse
gases emissions from fossil fuels, their decline in reserves and consequent
increasing price, and potential impacts on climate change, many countries
are now reexamining their national energy policies with view of shifting
toward low-carbon and renewable energy sources (Adaramola, 2015;
Adaramola and Vagnes, 2015). Among the various forms of renewable en-
ergies such as wind energy, bioenergy and others, photovoltaic energy oc-
cupies a prominent position due to many peculiarities.
Economic incentives, reduction in cost, and the fast technological
developments allow the use of grid connected photovoltaic plants in a
simple, efcient and protable way. The photovoltaic (PV) energy
assumes, therefore, an increasing role within the spectra of the energy
sources, especially for its simplicity of installation and integration in build-
ing architecture (Micheli et al., 2014). Consequently the global cumulative
installed capacity of PV systems increased rapidly from about 1.3 GW in
2000 to 139 GW at the end of 2013 (Adaramola, 2015).
Brazil has an excellent level of solar radiation mainly in the northeast
region. In its semi-arid region there is the best insolation, with typical
values of 200 to 250 W/m2 of continuous power which is equivalent the
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: lutero.lima@uece.br (L.C. de Lima).
falling solar radiation from 1752 to 2190 kWh/m2/year (Marques et al.,
2009; Braga, 2008; Ruether and Zilles, 2011). Considering the country's ad-
vantageous solar radiation conditions, grid connected photovoltaics, with
an installed capacity of only 4.5 MWp in the year 2013, is still an unrepre-
sented energy form in Brazil (Holdermann et al., 2014). Grid connected PV
experience in Brazil is still limited to a handful of small installations oper-
ating at universities, research institutes (Ruether and Zilles, 2011), some
private institutions (MPX for example), few in residences and commerce,
at least in its northeast region. So it is important for the country to be pre-
pared and to accumulate experience with grid connected PV in order to be
able to make the most of distributed benets of this benign technology
when it becomes more cost-effective (Jannuzzi and de Melo, 2013).
Performance assessment of PV systems is the best way to determine
the potential for PV power production in an area (Adaramola and
Vagnes, 2015). Usually the performance of photovoltaic modules refers
to Standard Test Condition (STC) which is not always representative for
the real module operation (Micheli et al., 2014). PV module technology,
weather conditions (incident radiation, temperatures), inclination,
inverter and control systems, sun-tracker system, and wiring are factors
which inuence the performance of a PV system (Dez-Mediavilla et al.,
2012). There are many performance evaluation studies of PV systems
installed outdoors across Europe and globally as referenced by
Adaramola and Vagnes (2015), Micheli et al. (2014), Dez-Mediavilla
et al. (2012), Ayompe et al. (2011), Mpholo et al. (2015), Kumar et al.
(2014), Padmavathi and Daniel (2013), to name a few. However Brazil
and the Latin America are poorly represented in such studies although
presenting an immense potential for its utilization (Dvi et al., 2016).
As highlighted by Ayompe et al. (2011), the performance
assessment of a PV system include parameters calculation such as:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2017.01.004
0973-0826/ 2017 International Energy Initiative. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
80 L.C. de Lima et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 37 (2017) 7985
annual energy generated, reference yield, array yield, nal yield, array
capture losses, system losses and cell temperature losses, PV module ef-
ciency, system efciency, inverter efciency, performance ratio, and
capacity factor. Results obtained will provide useful information to pol-
icy makers and interested individual and organization about actual per-
formance of grid connected PV system in a region or country
(Adaramola and Vagnes, 2015).
The state of Cear located in the northeast cost of Brazil, in the
semi-arid region, has a land extension of about 149,000 km2 which
correspond to 1.74% of the Brazil's territory and population of about
8.5 million inhabitants. Cear has a considerable potential for renewable
energies under the forms of solar, wind and biomass. The wind energy
potential of Cear is estimated in 35 GW and at the end of the present
year it is expected to reach 1.8 GW of installed wind farms in operation.
The average daily solar radiation in one square meter in Cear reaching
about 5.5 kWh is one of the highest in Brazilian territory. At the year
2011 the state launched a 1 MW private and commercial photovoltaic
power plant in the city of Tau, 350 km far from its capital, Fortaleza
(Esteves et al., 2015). At the present time, the government of such
state is improving regulatory framework in order to promote the
increase in the insertion of photovoltaic systems in the domestic mar-
ket. In the near future it is expected to reach 270 MW of installed pho-
tovoltaic systems (Jornal dirio do nordeste, 2016).
The main objective of this article is to show the one year perfor-
mance of a grid connected 2.2 kWp photovoltaic system installed at
the State University of Cear in the city of Fortaleza Brazil.
The grid connected PV system
The grid connected PV system used in the present study is installed
in the dependence of the Master Program on Applied Physics of the
State University of Cear, as shown in the Fig. 1. The system started op-
eration on November, 2012. The University is located on the latitude
3.40S and longitude 38.33W, and about 31 m above sea level. The PV
system consists of 18 modules covering a total area of 29 m2 with an
installed capacity of 4.4 kWp. For the present study only 9 modules
were used because of limitation on the number of available inverters.
By this way the used system consists of 9 modules covering an area of
14.5 m2 with an installed capacity of 2.2 kWp. The Canadian Solar
CS6P-245P of 245 Wp modules were used. The modules were tilted at
a xed angle of 13 and oriented northward at an azimuth angle of 12.
The SMA Sunny Boy SB 2500-HF-30 inverter was used for
transforming the voltage from DC to AC and connected to the utility
grid. The inverter had a rated maximum efciency of 96.3% and
maximum AC power of 2500 W. The sizing ratio which represents the
ratio between the PV array installed capacity and the inverter capacity,
in the present case, it was 0.9. The inverter was connected to the Sunny
Fig. 1. Picture of the PV array used.
WebBox via a serial RS485 link. Data recorded on 5 min intervals in the
WebBox was extracted via an SD card and read directly into a computer.
Solar radiation, wind speed and ambient temperature were provided by
an automatic Meteorological Station (50 m close to the PV system) of
the FUNCEME Cear State Foundation for Meteorology and Water
Resources.
Performance parameters
The performance of a grid connected PV system usually is evaluated
taking as reference the IEC 61724 Standard. Evaluated parameters are:
energy output, yields (reference yield, array yield and nal yield),
array and system energy losses, system efciencies (array efciency,
system efciency and inverter efciency), performance ratio and
capacity factor (Adaramola and Vagnes, 2015; Dez-Mediavilla et al.,
2012; Ayompe et al., 2011; IEC, 1998; Ozden et al., 2017; Dobaria
et al., 2016; Elhadj Sidi et al., 2016; Mpholo et al., 2015; Sundaram
and Babu, 2015; Kumar et al., 2014; Sharma and Chandel, 2013;
Padmavathi and Daniel, 2013; Wittkopf et al., 2012). Energy quantities
are evaluated normalized to rated array power and referred to as yields
which indicate the actual array operation relative to its rated capacity.
System efciencies are normalized to array area (Padmavathi and
Daniel, 2013). These normalized performance parameters are relevant
since they provide a basis under which grid tied PV systems can be
compared under various operating conditions (Adaramola and
Vagnes, 2015).
Energy output
The total energy is dened as the amount of alternating current
(AC) power generated by the system over a given period of time. The
total hourly, daily and monthly energy produced can be determined
respectively as:
60
EAC;h EAC; t 1
t1
24
EAC;d EAC; h 2
h1
N
EAC;m EAC; d 3
d1
where EAC,t is AC energy output at time t (in min); EAC,h is AC
energy output at hour h; EAC,d is the daily AC energy output; EAC,m
is the monthly AC energy output and N is the number of days in a
month.
System yields
The system yields can be classied into three types which are
array, nal and reference yields. The yields indicate the actual array
operation relative to its rated capacity. The array yield YA is dened
as the direct current (DC) energy output from the PV array over a
given period of time normalized by the PV rated power (Adaramola
and Vagnes, 2015). It represents the time, measured in kWh/kWp,
that the PV array must be operating with its nominal power
to generate the energy produced (Elhadj Sidi et al., 2016). It is
given as:
EDC

YA kWh=kWp 4
PPV;rated
where EDC is the DC energy output (kWh) from the PV array.
The nal yield YF is dened as the total AC energy generated by the
PV system for a dened period of time divided by the rated output
 L.C. de Lima et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 37 (2017) 7985 81

power of the installed PV system (Sharma and Chandel, 2013). It indi- approaches ideal performance during real operation and allows com-
cates how many hours a day the PV system must operate at its rated parison of PV systems independent of location, tilt angle, orientation
power in order to produce the same amount of energy as was recorded. and their nominal rated power capacity (Padmavathi and Daniel,
It is given as: 2013; Ayompe et al., 2011). The PV system efciency is compared
with the nominal efciency of the photovoltaic generator under
EAC

YF kWh=kWp 5 standard test conditions. Performance ratio is dened as the ratio of
PPV;rated the nal energy yield of the PV system YF to the reference yield YR
(Ozden et al., 2017):
where EAC is the AC energy output (kWh).
The reference yield YR is the total in-plane insolation or global in-plane 100  Y F
horizontal insolation divided by the reference irradiance under standard PR % 12
YR
temperature conditions which is 1 kW/m2. It is a measure of the theoret-
ical energy available at a specic location over a specied time period. The
reference yield can be calculated by: Capacity factor
HT

YR kWh=kWp 6 The capacity factor is a means used to present the energy delivered
HR
by an electric power generating system (Elhadj Sidi et al., 2016) and is
where HT is the in-plane solar radiation and HR is the reference irradiance. dened as the ratio of AC energy produced by the PV system over a
given period of time (usually one year) to the energy output that
Array and system energy losses would have been generated if the system were operated at full capacity
for the entire period. The annual capacity factor of the PV system is
The array capture losses LA represent the losses due to array operation given by the following equation:
that highlight the inability of the array to fully utilize the available irradi-
EAC
ance (Wittkopf et al., 2012). The array capture losses are the difference CF 13
PPV;rated  8; 760
between the reference yield and the array yield. It is given as:


LA YR YA kWh=kWp 7
Results and discussion
The system losses LS are as due to losses in converting the DC power
output from PV to AC power by the inverter. It is given as: Fig. 2 shows the monthly average produced electrical energy and the

measured in-plane solar irradiation. The irradiation varied between the
LS YA Y F kWh=kWp 8 value of 1970.5 kWh in April 2014 and 2908.7 kWh in October 2013. The
lowest value of solar radiation was inside the rainy season in Fortaleza
and the highest value was during the dry summer period.
System efciencies The lowest value of monthly produced electrical energy was
244.9 kWh by April 2014 and the highest produced energy in the
The efciency of a PV system can be grouped into PV array measured period was 374.0 kWh by October 2013. In the period of
efciency, system efciency and inverter efciency. Depending on the 12 months it was produced 3708.2 kWh being the monthly average of
available data and desire level of resolution, these efciencies can 309.0 kWh. The nal produced energy during the period divided by
be determined on instantaneous, hourly, daily, monthly and annually the rated power of the system is 1685.5 kWh/kWp. In city such as
bases. The array efciency is based on the DC power output while the Tiruchirappalli, India, the energy output is 1600 kWh/kWp, in Malaga,
system efciency is a function of the AC power output. The array Spain, is 1,339 kWh/kWp, in Crete, Greece is 1336.4 kWh/kWp,
efciency PV represents the mean energy conversion efciency of the 1230 kWh/kWp in Calabria, Italy, 700 kWh/kWp in Netherlands,
PV array, which is the ratio of daily array energy output (DC) to the 730 kWh/kWp in Germany, 790 kWh/kWp in Switzerland, up to
product of total daily in-plane irradiation and area of the PV array 1840 kWh/kWp in Israel and 1372 kWh/kWp in India (Mpholo et al.,
(Wittkopf et al., 2012). The PV module efciency is calculated by the 2015).
following equation: During the dry period (June 2013 to March 2014) it is concentrated
the highest values of produced electrical energy and during the rainy
100  EDC period in the months of April and May of 2014 it was veried the lowest
PV % 9
Ht  Am values of produced energy of 244.9 kWh and 257.5 kWh, respectively.
The city of Fortaleza, capital of the state of Cear, is located in the
where Am = array area (m2). The overall system efciency represents
northeast region of Brazil and has a tropical savanna climate with dry
the performance of the entire PV system installed and it is given as:
winters. Over the course of a year, the temperature typically varies
100  EAC from 24 C to 31 C, being the annual average of 26.6 C. Rarely its
SYS % 10 ambient temperature is below 22 C or above 32 C. The length of the
Ht  Am
day does not vary substantially over the course of the year, staying
The inverter efciency is given as: within 20 min of 12 h throughout. The shortest day is June 20 with
11:54 h of daylight and the longest day is December 21 with 12:20 h
100  EAC of daylight. From November to May is the period of clouds in Fortaleza
INV % 11
EDC being April 6 the cloudiest day of the year and August 28 the clearest
day of the year. As can be seen in Fig. 2 in the period of clouds the
electrical energy production of the PV system decreases and by coinci-
Performance ratio dence April is the month where the PV system produced the minimum
of electrical energy in the measured period and August was the second
The performance ratio (PR) indicates the overall effect of losses on a most productive month of electrical energy. On the other hand, the
PV array's normal power output. The PR values indicate how close it in-plane solar irradiation was the minimum in April and the maximum
82 L.C. de Lima et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 37 (2017) 7985
Fig. 2. Monthly energy production and in-plane irradiation.
in October. Precipitation shows the same statistical pattern of clouds in
Fortaleza. However the wind speed strongly impacts the production of
electrical energy in PV systems in Fortaleza. For example, over the
course of a typical year wind speeds vary from 0 m/s to 9 m/s. The
average daily maximum wind speed of 8 m/s occurs around October 5
declining very slowing during the months of August, September and
November. The period of August to October is the most productive
one of the here studied PV system. On the other hand, the least produc-
tive period comprehends the months of March, April and May where
the lowest average wind speed is of 3 m/s (Weatherspark, 2016).
Wind ow on PV modules contributes to the decrease of cells operating
temperature. Higher wind speeds are benecial to PV module operation
because of the cooling effect on PV modules (Elhadj Sidi et al., 2016). In a
typical day of October when the system presented its most productive
period temperature of the back surface of one module, ambient
temperature, levels of solar radiation, and wind speeds were measured.
The ambient temperature varied from 27.2 C to 32.1 C, the module
temperature varied from 29.1 C to 45.5 C, the maximum monitored
solar irradiation was 1030 W/m2, and the wind speed varied from
3.3 m/s to 6.9 m/s. The increase in the ambient temperature and module
temperature was followed by the simultaneous increase in the level of
solar radiation, as expected. The maximum difference of temperature
between ambient and module was 14.4 C with the solar radiation
level of 800899 W/m2 and wind speed was around 6.1 m/s.
The output power of the PV system has a linear relationship with the
solar radiation as shown in Fig. 3 and demonstrated by the correlation
coefcient (R2) of 0.9811. The equation which correlates the output
electrical energy (EAC) with solar radiation (H) is EAC = 0.1319H
Fig. 3. AC output power of the PV system and solar radiation.
1.4260. Equation obtained by Adaramola and Vagnes (2015) gives
value about 5% higher than the present one. This difference is inside
the range of experimental uncertainty. The importance of one equation
such this is that it make possible to evaluate the energy output of a PV
system just by only knowing the incident in-plane solar radiation.
Ayompe et al. (2011) have also presented one of this equation although
the difference between the equation of the present study and theirs is
very considerable with values around 15% higher. It is supposed that
such difference could be due to specic characteristics of each individual
PV system and possibly two of them are components of different
manufacturers and different climatic conditions.
The variation of the monthly average daily reference, array and nal
yields are shown in Fig. 4. It can be observed that the lowest values of
them occurred in the rainy period and are 4.5 kWh/kWp/day,
3.9 kWh/kWp/day and 3.7 kWh/kWp/day in April 2014, respectively.
The highest observed values of reference yield of 6.5 kWh/kWp/day
was in the month October 2013, of array and nal yields were
5.8 kWh/kWp/day and 5.5 kWh/kWp/day, for the month of September,
respectively. The monthly averages for the period of one year
of measurements were 5.6 kWh/kWp/day, 4.9 kWh/kWp/day and
4.6 kWh/kWp/day, respectively. For all months of the monitored period,
there is a practically constant difference between average array yield
and system yield. This difference is due to DC/AC conversion losses
produced in the inverter, showing that irrespective of the climatic
conditions the inverter spent almost the same monthly energy to
process conversion. This reasoning makes sense because as seen
before the ambient temperature in Fortaleza varies from 24 C to
31 C during the course of a year. Vignola et al. (2008) observed that
 L.C. de Lima et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 37 (2017) 7985
Fig. 4. Monthly average daily yields.
for about every 12 C rise in ambient temperature the inverter efciency
falls about 1%.
The lowest values of yields are observed in the rainy period of the
Brazilian northeast which is between months of February and May.
Values observed between June and January are higher than values of
the rainy period because of the dry climatic conditions and higher
solar in-plane irradiation.
Comparing yield values of the present system with values of
others studies, the average nal yield of the present study was
4.6 kWh/kWp/day being a value higher than the majority of values
found in the literature. For example, in cities where the climatic condi-
tions were relatively similar to the semi-arid of Brazil, as for example,
Nicosia, Cyprus, the average nal yield was 4.3 kWh/kWp/day and in
the city of Sawda, in Kuwait, with arid climate, the nal yield was
4.5 kWh/kWp/day (Adaramola and Vagnes, 2015).
Fig. 5 shows the monthly average daily array capture and system
losses relative to reference yield. In the month of November it
is observed the highest value capture losses in the array of
1.42 kWh/kWp/day and the lowest value of 0.13 kWh/kWp/day was
observed in the month of March. These values correspond to 22.5%
and 2.3% of the respective monthly reference yields. In a PV system
installed in Rajkot, India, capture losses were 22.27% and 3.79% of the
respective reference yields (Dobaria et al., 2016). For a system in
Singapore number were 22.66% and 17.06% (Wittkopf et al., 2012).
One of the factors that collaborated for the increase in the losses of
array in the month of November was the inuence of shadowing of a
concrete post close to the PV system. Losses in the system varied from
0.21 kWh/kWp/day in April to the value of 0.32 kWh/kWp/day in
Fig. 5. Average daily array capture, system and overall losses.
83
October, as shown in Fig. 5. These numbers correspond to 5.7% and
4.2% of the respective reference yields. Corresponding values of 26.3%
and 3.55% were found in PV system in Mauritania (Elhadj Sidi et al.,
2016), 18.57% and 10.34% for system in Lesotho (Mpholo et al., 2015),
5.55% and 5.06% in Singapore (Wittkopf et al., 2012) and 21.23% and
2.89% in Ireland (Mondol et al., 2006). The maximum overall losses
were veried in November with value of 1.71 kWh/kWp/day and
the minimum in March with the value 0.38 kWh/kWp/day. These
numbers correspond to 27.1% and 6% of the respective reference yields.
The annual average array capture, system and overall losses were
0.71 kWh/kWp/day, 0.27 kWh/kWp/day and 1.05 kWh/kWp/day,
respectively.
The monthly average array, system and inverter efciencies through
the recording period are shown in Fig. 6. The monthly average values
are 13.3%, 12.6% and 94.6%, respectively. The highest values of efcien-
cies in the array, system and inverter were 14.8% (in August), 13.9%
(in August) and 95.3% (in July), respectively.
In the months of November, December and January, shadowing of
the system caused reduction in the efciencies of array and system,
and possibly in the inverter efciency. Shadowing of a concrete electri-
cal grid post in the array caused this reduction in efciencies in the
referred months thus resulting in values such as 11.8% and 11.1% for
the efciencies of array and system, respectively. In those months the
inverter efciency remained around 94%, the lowest value.
In Fig. 7 it can be observed the monthly average daily performance
ratio and capacity factor. The annual average performance ratio was
82.9% with the minimum value in November of 72.9% and the maxi-
mum value of 91.9% in March. Performance ratio is a measurement
84 L.C. de Lima et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 37 (2017) 7985
Fig. 6. Average array, system and inverter efciencies.
index for how close a system approaches ideal performance during real
operation (Mpholo et al., 2015). The performance of the present system
accused decline in the months November, December and January due to
shadowing of the concrete post, as already written before. The rainy
season of March to May did show also decline in the performance
ratio. In India performance ratio of different systems varies from 68%
to 83% (Dobaria et al., 2016), from 55% to 94% (Kumar et al., 2014),
from 60% to 78% (Padmavathi and Daniel, 2013), from 55 to 83%
(Sharma and Chandel, 2013), and from 85.5% to 92.3% (Sundaram and
Babu, 2015). In Mauritania it varies from 63.6% to 73.6% (Elhadj Sidi
et al., 2016), in Lesotho it varies from 35% to 79% (Mpholo et al.,
2015), and in Oman in desertic weather conditions the average perfor-
mance ratio was 84.6% (Kazem et al., 2014). In Germany it varies from
38% to 88%, in Thailand it varies from 70% to 90% and in Poland from
50% to 80% (Mpholo et al., 2015). In Ireland it varies from 72.3% to
91.6% (Mondol et al., 2006). In Singapore it varies from 76% to 83%
(Wittkopf et al., 2012). The variation of monthly performance ratio of
Fortaleza is relatively close to some locations in India, Oman and
Thailand.
The annual average capacity factor was 19.2%, with a minimum
value of 15.5% in April and the maximum value of 23.1% in September.
Capacity factor is the index that demonstrates the quantity of time in
percentage which the production of the photovoltaic system operates
in its highest capacity. Therefore the system produced in its maximum
capacity approximately 70.2 days or 1684.5 h. The capacity factor,
being a factor which has a direct implication on the cost of electricity
generation, shows its maximum real value in somewhat less than 0.5
(Padmavathi and Daniel, 2013) or in a more precise reasoning the
typical capacity factor for a PV system is in the range of 0.15 to 0.4
Fig. 7. Average performance ratio and capacity factor.
(Kazem et al., 2014). Therefore together with the performance
ratio, capacity factor is a very important parameter to evaluate a grid
connected photovoltaic system. In India, for example, capacity factor
across the country varies between 16% and 20% (Padmavathi and
Daniel, 2013). In Mauritania capacity factor varies from a minimum of
11.7% in winter to a maximum of 20.5% (Elhadj Sidi et al., 2016). In
Lesotho the average is 17.2% ranging from 8.7% to 21% (Mpholo et al.,
2015). In Malaysia a system presented capacity factor of 10.47%
(Khatib et al., 2013). In Norway the annual average of one studied PV
system was 10.6% (Adaramola and Vagnes, 2015) and 10.1% for a
system in Dublin (Mondol et al., 2006).
Conclusions
In this article, the 2.2 kWp grid connected photovoltaic system
installed at the State University of Cear Brazil was studied from
June 2013 to May 2014 and its performance parameters were deter-
mined. The total output energy during the measured period was of
3708,2 kWh and the rated energy output was 1685.5 kWh/kWp. The
daily average reference, array and nal yields, the array capture, system
and overall losses, the array, system and inverter efciencies, the
performance ratio and the capacity factor varied from a minimum to a
maximum values of 4.5 kWh/kWp6.5 kWh/kWp, 3.9 kWh/kWp
5.8 kWh/kWp, 3.7 kWh/kWp5.5 kWh/kWp, 0.13 kWh/kWp
1.42 kWh/kWp, 0.21 kWh/kWp0.32 kWh/kWp, 0.38 kWh/kWp
1.71 kWh/kWp, 11.8%14.8%, 11.1%13.9%, 94%95.3%, 72.9%91.9%
and 15.5%23.1%, respectively. The monthly average values for the
entire period of measurements were 5.6 kWh/kWp, 4.9 kWh/kWp,
4.6 kWh/kWp, 0.71 kWh/kWp, 0.27 kWh/kWp, 1.05 kWh/kWp, 13.3%,
 L.C. de Lima et al. / Energy for Sustainable Development 37 (2017) 7985
12.6%, 94.6%, 82.9% and 19.2%, respectively. These numbers could be
better if the here studied PV system didn't suffer the shadow interfer-
ence of a concrete post during the months of November, December
and January. Notwithstanding performance results show the good
potential of producing electricity through photovoltaic solar energy in
the state of Cear Brazil.
Acknowledgments
The authors kindly acknowledge the ENER Comrcio e Servios de
Energias Renovveis Ltda. (Juan and Jeronimo) for the donation of the
photovoltaic system, product of this research, to the State University
of Cear. One of the authors (L.C. de Lima) acknowledges nancial sup-
port of CNPq Brazilian National Council for Scientic and Technologi-
cal Development through Research Contract number 473344/2012-2.
Authors are also indebted to FUNCEME Cear State Foundation for
Meteorology and Water Resources for providing meteorological data.
References
Adaramola MS. Techno-economic analysis of a 2.1 kW rooftop photovoltaic-grid-tied sys-
tem base on actual performance. Energy Convers Manag 2015;101:8593.
Adaramola MS, Vagnes EET. Preliminary assessment of a small-scale rooftop PV-grid tied
in Norwegian climatic conditions. Energy Convers Manag 2015;90:45865.
Average Weather for Fortaleza, Brazil. https://weatherspark.com/averages/33419/Forta-
leza-Ceara-Brazil, 2016.
Ayompe LM, Duffy A, McCormack SJ, Conlon M. Measured performance of a 1.72 kW roof-
top grid connected photovoltaic system in Ireland. Energy Convers Manag 2011;52:
81625.
Braga Renata Pereira. Energia solar fotovoltaica: fundamentos e aplicaes. 2008. 80 f. TCC
(Graduao) - Curso de Engenharia Eltrica. Rio de Janeiro: Escola Politcnica,
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; 2008. [(in portuguese). Available in:
bhttp://monograas.poli.ufrj.br/monograas/monopoli10001103.pdfN; 2008
[Accessed in 10.09.2016]].
Dvi GA, Caamano-Martn E, Ruether R, Solano J. Energy performance evaluation of a net
plus-energy residential building with grid-connected photovoltaic system in Brazil.
Energy Build 2016;120:1929.
Dez-Mediavilla M, Alonso-Tristn C, Rodrguez-Amigo MC, Garca-Caldern T, Dieste-
Velasco MI. Performance analysis of PV plants: optimization for improving protabil-
ity. Energy Convers Manag 2012;54:1723.
Dobaria B, Pandya M, Aware M. Analytical assessment of 5.05 kWp grid tied photovoltaic
plant performance on the system level in a composite climate of Western India.
Energy 2016;111:4751.
Elhadj Sidi CEB, Ndiaye ML, Bah ME, Mbodji A, Ndiaye A, Ndiaye PA. Performance analysis
of the rst large-scale (15 MWp) grid-connected photovoltaic plant in Mauritania.
Energy Convers Manag 2016;119:41121.
85
Esteves NB, Sigal A, Leiva EPM, Rodriguez CR, Cavalcante FSA, de Lima LC. Wind and solar
hydrogen for the potential production of ammonia in the state of Cear Brazil. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2015;40:991723.
Holdermann C, Kissel J, Beigel J. Distributed photovoltaic generation in Brazil: an econom-
ic viability analysis of small-scale photovoltaic systems in the residential and com-
mercial sectors. Energy Policy 2014;67:6127.
IEC Standard 61724. Photovoltaic system performance monitoring-guidelines for mea-
surement, data exchange and analysis; 1998.
Jannuzzi GM, de Melo CA. Grid-connected photovoltaic in Brazil: policies and potential
impacts for 2030. Energy Sustain Dev 2013;17:406.
Jornal dirio do nordeste. (in portuguese). Available in: http://diariodonordeste.
verdesmares.com.br/cadernos/negocios/projetos-de-energia-solar-no-ce-somam-
270-mw-1.1477088, 2016. [Accessed in 10.09.2016].
Kazem HA, Khatib T, Sopian K, Elmenreich W. Performance and feasibility assessment of a
1.4 kW roof top grid-connected photovoltaic power system under desertic weather
conditions. Energy Build 2014;82:1239.
Khatib T, Sopian K, Kazem HA. Actual performance and characteristic of a grid connected
photovoltaic power system in the tropics: a short term evaluation. Energy Convers
Manag 2013;71:1159.
Kumar KA, Sundareswaran K, Venkateswaram PR. Performance study on a grid connected
20 kWp solar photovoltaic installation in an industry in Tiruchirappalli (India). Ener-
gy Sustain Dev 2014;23:294304.
Marques RC, Krauter SCW, de Lima LC. Energia solar fotovoltaica e perspectivas de
autonomia energtica para o nordeste brasileiro. Rev Tecnol 2009;30:15362.
Micheli D, Alessandrini S, Radu R, Casula I. Analysis of the outdoor performance and ef-
ciency of two grid connected photovoltaic systems in northern Italy. Energy Convers
Manag 2014;80:43645.
Mondol JD, Yohanis Y, Smyth M, Norton B. Long term performance analysis of a grid con-
nected photovoltaic system in Northern Ireland. Energy Convers Manag 2006;47:
292547.
Mpholo M, Nchaba T, Monese M. Yield and performance analysis of the rst grid-
connected solar farm at Moshoeshoe I International Airport, Lesotho. Renew Energy
2015;81:84552.
Ozden T, Akinoglu BG, Turan R. Long term outdoor performance of three different on-grid
PV arrays in central Anatolia an extended analysis. Renew Energy 2017;101:
18295.
Padmavathi K, Daniel SA. Performance analysis of a 3 MWp grid connected solar photo-
voltaic power plant in India. Energy Sustain Dev 2013;17:61525.
Ruether R, Zilles R. Making the case for grid-connected photovoltaics in Brazil. Energy Pol-
icy 2011;39:102730.
Sharma V, Chandel SS. Performance analysis of a 190 kWp grid interactive solar photovol-
taic power plant in India. Energy 2013;55:47685.
Sundaram S, Babu JSC. Performance evaluation and validation of 5 MWp grid connected
solar photovoltaic plant in South India. Energy Convers Manag 2015;100:42939.
Vignola F, Mavromatakis F, Krumsick J. Performance of inverters. Proc. of the 37th ASES
Annual Conference, San Diego, CA; 2008.
Wittkopf S, Valliappan S, Liu L, Ang KS, Cheng SCJ. Analytical performance monitoring of a
142.5 kWp grid-connected rooftop BIPV system in Singapore. Renew Energy 2012;47:
920.